Any landlord would evict tenants who paid only half the rent, year after year. That's what Utah County ought to do about state prisoners housed at the county jail that the state refuses to pay for.

Because the state is not paying what it's supposed pay, Utah County taxpayers are forced to ante up about $400,000 a year out of their own pockets. The state doesn't live up to its agreement to pay for state inmates sent to the county lockup. Even if it did, it's still leaving half the burden on local shoulders. It's an unfunded mandate that costs Utah County millions each year. And many of the prisoners are not even local crooks.

Here's how it works: A crook is found guilty in state court of an offense that would send him to the state prison. But early probation was granted on condition that he be housed for a time in a county jail.

In a really bad business arrangement, the state is obliged to reimburse the counties for only 50 percent of the cost of county klink time.

If we were talking about only a handful of cases, this might be tolerable. But currently about 200 of the 500-plus Utah County prisoners are state inmates. And the state doesn't even come up with its promised half-share. This year, state funding is $400,000 short.

A prominent lawmaker tried to explain how this happens. Sen. Curtis Bramble, R-Provo, said that lawmakers allocate funds based on an estimated number of prisoners in the coming year. "We can't appropriate on a per-prisoner basis. We appropriate on dollars," Bramble said.

Inconveniently for Bramble's argument, schools are reimbursed on a per-student basis. Why can't prisoners be paid for on the same basisfi After all, it can be argued that the two groups have much in common. Or take the example of a cell phone in which a consumer pays by the minute. If he goes over, he pays more. This is simple arithmetic.

We fail to see why, if more state prisoners are sent to county jails in a given year, the state escapes its obligation to pay for them. The state made a deal -- a lopsided one at that -- and it should at least stick to the agreement.

That is just the tip of the iceberg, however. Even if the state met its half-price obligation, it would only be paying $31 for the actual $62 a day cost to Utah County. Officials estimate the shortfall costs the county $2.5 million a year.

It's not clear how this one-sided arrangement was cooked up. But the Utah Association of County Governments is pushing for a more equitable deal, and it's high time one was worked out.

In truth, the state should be paying 100 percent of the cost for state prisoners. Upon what rational basis do state prisoners become the financial obligation of Utah County taxpayersfi

Because of the state prisoners, the county jail has been full for years. It's now being expanded, to the tune of $20 million. Without a couple of hundred state prisoners, the county wouldn't need that costly project.

Construction of state prisons to house prison-worthy offenders is clearly the state's responsibility. It's a basic governmental task. If new prison facilities were built at a rate that kept pace with genuine need, there would be no need to play a shell game with county jails that basically steals money from local taxpayers.

(Come to think of it, isn't the theft of $2.5 million a felonyfi)

This unfunded mandate for prisoners hurts Utah County. And there's little prospect for relief, which brings us back to the rent analogy.

If a renter defaulted on more than half his rent, his landlord would toss him out on the street. That's exactly what Sheriff Jim Tracy ought to do, with the blessing of the Utah County Commission -- put the 200 state prisoners on buses and drop them off at the gate of the Utah State Prison with a note: "Returned due to insufficient funds."